yougile_list_string_stickers

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already indicate readOnlyHint=true and destructiveHint=false, so the safety profile is covered. The description adds useful response behavior by noting that 'States are embedded in each sticker object,' which informs the agent about the shape of the returned data beyond the schema. It does not contradict the annotations.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that opens with the verb, includes a clarifying parenthetical, and a compact note on states. No superfluous content; it is appropriately sized and front-loaded.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a simple list operation with full schema coverage and read-only annotations, the description covers the core purpose and one behavioral nuance (embedded states). However, it does not mention alternatives or pagination behavior beyond the schema, so it is complete but not exhaustive.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

All three parameters (limit, offset, projectId) have descriptions in the schema, achieving 100% coverage. The tool description provides no additional parameter-level details, so the baseline of 3 applies as the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('List') and identifies the exact resource ('string stickers') with an explanatory parenthesis ('custom labels/tags for tasks'). This clearly distinguishes it from sibling list tools like yougile_list_sprint_stickers and from CRUD operations on string stickers.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is given on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as yougile_list_sprint_stickers or the individual yougile_get_string_sticker. The description only states what the tool does, leaving the agent to infer usage context without explicit when-to-use or when-not-to-use guidance.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.